Awaaz - South Asia Watch News

News and information provided in conjunction with South Asia Citizens Wire and other sources
Posts do not necessarily reflect the views of Awaaz

Saturday, July 03, 2004

Posted by: Awaaz / 7/03/2004 02:59:14 PM

Washington Post [USA]
June 13, 2004; Page A22
AT AN ISLAMIC SCHOOL, HINTS OF EXTREMIST TIES
Pakistani Seminary Probed in Wave of Militant Attacks
By John Lancaster and Kamran Khan Washington Post Foreign Service

KARACHI, Pakistan -- Gracious and fluent in English, which he said he learned while growing up in South Africa, the bearded religious scholar welcomed a foreign visitor onto the well-kept grounds of the Jamiat-ul-Uloom Islamiya, one of the country's largest Sunni Muslim seminaries.

"I will answer all of your questions," said the scholar, Ismail Mulla, as an attendant poured cups of sweet, milky tea. Nearby, students in prayer caps strolled across a white-marble courtyard, hunched over religious texts in sweltering classrooms or sat cross-legged on carpets for a midday meal of mutton and flatbread.

As Mulla described it, the institution has one purpose: to prepare young men for a life of propagating Islam. "We teach basically the Koran and the Sunnah" -- the sayings of the prophet Muhammad -- said Mulla.

But the placid setting belied what some analysts and police investigators have said is a link between some people at the seminary and Islamic extremists responsible for a wave of attacks against foreigners, senior government officials and religious minorities over the last few years.

The seminary, or madrassa, had been led by Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai, until he was gunned down in front of it on May 30. Shamzai, an associate of Osama bin Laden and Taliban leader Mohammad Omar, publicly urged his followers to wage holy war against U.S. forces in Afghanistan. A number of former students at the madrassa are being held at the U.S. detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to a May 4 report in the English-language newspaper Dawn.

Certain students or graduates of the madrassa have been implicated in an escalating series of attacks on members of the minority Shiite Muslim population, including the suicide bombing of a Shiite mosque that killed 23 worshipers on May 7, police said. That bombing marked the opening salvo in a surge of extremist violence -- including a brazen daylight attack Thursday on the motorcade of a senior army general -- that has killed more than 70 people in Karachi, the country's largest and most economically important city, in little more than five weeks.

Mulla, who was designated to speak for the organization, dismissed charges that the school is linked to terrorist groups. "Right next to us is a police station, so these are all lies," he said.

More broadly, the bloodletting has cast a spotlight on the nexus between some of Pakistan's estimated 10,000 madrassas and armed extremist groups. These groups once operated with the backing of the country's security services but more recently have targeted the government of Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan's president, in response to his support for the U.S.-led war on terrorism.

The government has not followed through on pledges to regulate the madrassas -- including plans to require the teaching of secular subjects such as math and science -- and to control their funding, some of which comes from radical sympathizers in Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries. Musharraf is reluctant to enforce the regulation, analysts said, because he wants to remain on good terms with radical Islamic political parties. The parties, along with the army, constitute a vital part of his power base, even if he has little use for their ideology.

"This government has done nothing to curb religious extremism in Karachi," said Samina Ahmed, who heads the Islamabad office of the International Crisis Group, a Brussels-based nonprofit that specializes in conflict resolution. "The madrassas are flourishing."

Government officials said most madrassas do not promote extremist violence. They described them as an important part of Pakistan's social safety net, providing free schooling and often room and board for hundreds of thousands of impoverished young people.

"If there are one or two rogue elements in any institution, it certainly doesn't seem prudent to close down the entire madrassa," said Interior Minister Faisel Saleh Hayat said in a telephone interview from Islamabad. "Such rogue elements can be found in any institution."

Hayat rejected criticism of the government on regulating the madrassas, saying the new federal budget will address modernizing their curriculum.

But the madrassas are likely to resist.

"Why do we have to change our curriculum?" asked Mulla, the Islamic scholar, noting that his madrassa -- while concentrating on religious studies -- already requires three years of schooling in math, science, English and social studies. In any case, he added, "do we go to the universities and say, 'You're teaching engineering, now you have to teach the Koran?' It's our right. Why should they interfere?"

Over the last two decades, military and civilian governments have encouraged the growth of the madrassa system, which has provided recruits for extremist groups allied with Pakistan's security forces. Many of the former students have become fighters in Afghanistan and in Indian-held Kashmir.

As part of his policy U-turn after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, Musharraf has taken a number of steps to sever the ties between the government and extremist groups, some of which were banned in 2002. By all accounts, however, most madrassas have yet to change their way of doing business, and continue to churn out thousands of religious zealots yearly.

The Jamiat-ul-Uloom Islamiya is a case in point.

Founded in the 1950s, the madrassa consists of a large walled compound whose red-painted minarets overlook a busy commercial thoroughfare in the Binori neighborhood of this overcrowded port city of more than 10 million people. The madrassa serves roughly 10,000 students, most from Pakistan but some from other countries such as Indonesia, Thailand and Malaysia, according to Mulla, 47, who is of Pakistani origin. He studied at the madrassa and returned here from Durban, South Africa, seven years ago to teach. The students, who range in age from 5 to 40, are schooled in the fundamentalist Deobandi tradition, which is similar to the austere Wahhabi version of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia.

"Every Muslim is a fundamentalist, and he should be," said Mulla, a tall, sinewy man with a stiff beard. "They should be practicing their religion to the teeth."

Though Mulla said the madrassa has no formal relationship with extremist groups, the late rector, Shamzai, made no secret of his sympathies. During the early 1990s, Pakistani intelligence officials said, Shamzai helped launch Harkat ul-Mujaheddin, which provided fighters for the insurgency against Indian forces in Kashmir and subsequently was blamed for the murders of five Western tourists in the disputed province. The leader of the group, Maulana Fazlul Rahman Khalil, was his former student at the madrassa.

In a 2002 interview, Shamzai boasted of his ties to another former student, Maulana Masood Azhar, a radical cleric imprisoned by Indian authorities and released after his followers hijacked an Indian Airlines jet to Kandahar, Afghanistan, in late 1999. A few months after that, Shamzai appeared with Azhar at the Karachi Press Club when Azhar announced the founding of Jaish-e-Muhammad, which was implicated in the December 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament complex in New Delhi and has been branded a terrorist group by the United States.

A soft-spoken man who died at 75 , Shamzai said in the 2002 interview that bin Laden had been "kind enough" to invite him to his son's wedding in Kandahar in 1998. Shamzai also considered himself a friend and admirer of Omar, the fugitive Taliban leader, according to Mulla. Following the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan, Shamzai issued numerous fatwas, or religious edicts, urging Muslims to rush to the aid of the Taliban.

"We support anybody that holds the banner of Islam," Mulla said. "We are all Taliban. You can say that."

The madrassa has also been accused of fostering violence against minority Shiite Muslims. One of its more notorious former students, for example, was Azam Tariq, the head of the anti-Shiite group Sipah-i-Sahaba, who was assassinated in last October in Islamabad. At the time of his death, Azam had 28 criminal cases pending against him, 18 of which involved sectarian violence, according to Muddassir Rizvi, an analyst at the International Crisis Group.

Recently, police have traced the May 7 bombing of the Hyderi mosque, a sandstone structure on the grounds of a colonial-era school, to a student at the madrassa, Qari Ghulam Murtaza. Although he had not completed his studies, Murtaza, in his early twenties, often led prayers at the Quba mosque in Karachi's Baghdadi district, where he recruited and "brainwashed" the young police trainee who carried out the suicide bombing, according to a senior investigator.

Another investigator described Murtaza as "very close" to Shamzai.

Qari Ahmad, the imam of the mosque, a simple structure whose main entrance opens onto a litter-strewn alleyway, said in an interview this week that Murtaza, who has since disappeared, went to Afghanistan twice to wage holy war against U.S.-led forces there. But Ahmad said that if Murtaza harbored any ill feelings toward Shiites, he kept them to himself. "I have no idea why he did it," Ahmad said. "I've never heard anything against Shiites here."

The Hyderi bombing set off a wave of violence that is still reverberating here. Three weeks after the attack, in an apparent act of retaliation, gunmen firing assault rifles from a car and a motorcycle killed Shamzai as he left his apartment across the street from the madrassa. The killing took place at about 7:30 a.m., triggering riots by Shamzai's students and followers.

A day later, a suicide bomber walked into another Shiite mosque less than a mile from the madrassa, detonating a blast so powerful that it split the concrete dome overhead. Sixteen worshipers died.

Mulla, the madrassa spokesman, said that if Murtaza was involved in the first bombing, "it wasn't because of us." In any case, he said, the school should not be held responsible for the actions of individuals. "If he's part of any organization, I can't do anything about it."

[ENDS]

'Aakrosh' and its battles with the Censor Board

---------- Forwarded message ----------

To, The Chief Reporter

Aakrosh, a short film on Gujarat Riots 2002 was banned by Censor Board, Mumbai in March 2003 and the ban was upheld by the I& B Ministry, Film Certification Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in June 2003. We moved the matter to Mumbai High Court through Writ Petition No. 2864 of 2003 and in a hard hitting judgement delivered on 3rd March 2004, Justice A.P. Shah and Justice S.C. Dharmadhikari came down heavily on the functioning and attitude of Censor Board to suppress the fact and cover up Gujarat Riots and ordered Censor Board to issue the Censor Certificate within 90 days to Aakrosh.

Censor Board did not comply the order and maintained silence on the issue. Aakrosh was selected at the Indo-British Film Festival, London in 2003, the I&B Ministry than forced festival authorities not to screen the Film on grounds that it did not have Censor Certificate and that the film was not cleared by the Government.

Aakrosh was the first film from India to be screened at Locarno Film Festival as best film on Human Rights issue in 2003 and it was an official entry at the Milano Film Festival and Los Angeles Film Festival.

We are in the process of producing a feature film in Gujarati on story based on Gujarat riots, but we fear that the film might meet the same fate as of Aakrosh, hence shooting is yet to begin. We wonder with the change in the Central Government whether the Censor Board will change its policy or continue to pursue the policies laid down by the earlier BJP led NDA Government in Centre. We need to find it out from the new I&B Ministry.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully, For People's Media Initiative

Ramesh Pimple Producer & Director

[ENDS]

In Defence of Our Dreams
Docu-lecture series VCD format

"In Defence of Our Dreams" is an important resource material for training students, youth, activists, political workers and politicians on themes related to communalism.

The docu-lectures by eminent specialists are richly edited with archival footage. The CDs are in English. The package contains the following:

Mridula Mukherjee Legacy of the Freedom Movement
Mihir Desai Secularism as a constitutional Right
Pralay Kanungo History of Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh
Harsh Mander Civil Society and State: Lessons from Gujarat
SK Thorat Caste, Dalits and Fascism
Nivedita Menon Gender – Issues, Movement & Interrelation with Communal Politics
Bipin Chandra The Urgency to Resist Fascist Forces
Rajdeep Sardesai Media: an Arena for Struggle
Rizwan Qaisar Communalisation of Education and History
K.M. Shrimali Is Ayodhya Just a Physical Site
K.N. Panikkar Cultural Roots of Communalism
Ram Punyani Facts & Myths
Sohail Hashmi Formation of Indian Identity
Digant Oza Gujarat before and after Carnage
Praful Bidwai Communalism, Nationalist Chauvinism & India - Pakistan Hostility
Rakesh Sharma Final Solution-Documentary on Gujarat
Gauhar Raza Zulmaton ke Daur Main/ Junoon ke Badhte Qadam
Saeed Mirza Unheard Voices Us Subha Ki Khatir Audio CD of movement songs ( tu zinda hai, woh subah kabhi to ayegi, gar ho sake to ab koye shamma jalayee, mandir masjid, ham sab is jahan main and more)

A few experts, creative artists and individuals who aspire for a secular, democratic and harmonious Indian society dreamt of the present project. The lecture covering various aspects of communalism delivered by eminent intellectuals were converted into lively documentaries of about 25-minute duration by Gauhar Raza.

Please send drafts to : Anhad, 4, Windsor Place, New Delhi-110001, tel-23327367/ 66 e-mail: anhad_delhi@yahoo.co.in Rs. 1000/- at Anhad office, By Courier -Rs 1000/- +50 (courier charges for one set) within India For other countries you may write to us.

[ENDS]

15 June 2004
Immediate Press Release
Siddiqui welcomes High Court judgment on Jilbab controversy

Dr. Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, leader of The Muslim Parliament, has welcomed the judgment given by Justice Hugh Bennett at the High Court who turned down Shabina Begum’s appeal to compel her school, Denbigh High School, Luton, to let her wear Jilbab instead of Shalwar Kameez, the traditional dress of Muslim women in the Subcontinent. He said when making demands, Muslims have to remain within the limits of reason. While asserting their cultural identity Muslims should avoid allowing themselves to be driven to extremes by expressions of Islamophobic sentiment.

For more information, please contact:

Dr. Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, 020 8563 1995/ 07860 259 289

[ENDS]

The Telegraph [UK]
TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH HIS EXCELLENCY PRESIDENT PERVEZ MUSHARRAF By Victoria Schofield (Filed: 20/06/2004)

How successful are operations against al Qa'eda and Taliban supporters in South Waziristan?

As far as this operation is concerned it is fairly successful. We do not know the results as yet. The operation is still on. We need to see the results once we flush out everyone and enter those complexes, then only we know what damage has been caused, the exact number of casualties. Firing was very accurate from our side, therefore a lot of damage must have been done.

Will this have an inflammatory effect on the rest of the country and in tribal territory?

No, I don't think it is going to spread in the tribal territory because of the right policies we followed. We followed the political path first. The jirga took certain decisions and the jirga ordered a lashkar to be formed and a laskhar was formed and it went inside but it failed and therefore according to regulations we were authorised to take certain actions against the subtribe which had failed to deliver, and that was followed by this military action.

In fact, we suffered casualties because of certain actions by the militants and therefore all the more reason that we undertook this military operation. I don' t think it is going to spread to other tribal regions. But it can have a fall out - these people have contacts elsewhere in the country and they can retaliate in the rest of the country in the form of bomb blasts, attacks on important persons and installations - and so we have to guard against that.

Looking at the law and order situation in Pakistan with frequent bomb blasts, the recent attack on your Corps Commander in Karachi - how connected is this with what is going on in tribal territory?

We are not very sure if it is related to Wana. We have apprehended the people who were involved. We will show them on television also at the right time. But we are not really sure if there is linkage with Taliban, al Qa'eda and the people who carried out this terrorist attack against the Corps Commander.

Now seems an ideal time to work towards incorporating tribal territory into Pakistan, but in view of the confused situation, are you having to go slow on plans to 'democratise' tribal territory?

Under the present circumstances we have to go slow. Because we don't know the undercurrents working there. It is a society which has been deprived in the past, ill educated, backward so we would not like to take actions where religious extremists get some kind of a hold in some areas, which could be counter-productive to the democratic process,

Because there would be a vacuum if you moved against the tribal leaders?

Yes, so we would much prefer acting with the tribal leadership - the maliks - who we are sure are not religious extremists.

Recently there have been a number of suicide bombings, is this a new phenomenon and much more difficult to control?

Yes - it is a new phenomenon. But it is not widespread; there have been a few incidents in Pakistan but it is not as bad as Palestine or Israel or Iraq. Because most of the incidents which you are seeing are not suicide bombings.

There are a few. However yes it is the most dangerous act because counter measures are difficult. We have to take coun ter measures in the form of breaking the groups. And may I very proudly say that the Intelligence agencies are doing an excellent job in breaking these groups. As I said the Corps Commander's attack was just a few days back and we have already got the people who were in the action.

So I think it's a great achievement if we can keep breaking these various factions who are either operating under sectarian extremism or religious extremism. Both these groups have to be battled with.

You are not prepared to release the names of those involved in the Karachi attack.

Not as yet. There are a few more left. We are very hopeful that we will get them in a few days. Until that time I don't want to comment.

In your talks with the government of India over Kashmir: you are intending to approach the Kashmir issue with flexibility - can you outline what Pakistan's position might be in terms of that flexibility?

I have used this word 'flexibility' very boldy. It does not go well in our domestic environment because there is a UN Security Council resolution of 1948 which says there has to be a plebisicte. Now our stand is unchanged. It does not meant that when I say flexibility that we have given up on our previous stand We are still holding onto the stand that there is a United Nations Security Council resolution.

However when we come to the negotiating table to find a solution, that is the time where I personally feel that each party needs to give up - you can't hold on to your maximalist position. Each party - Pakistan, India and the people of Kashmir. Maximalist positions will have to be a compromised by all in a spirit of flexibility. And that is what I meant.

All the groups have to show this spirit of flexibility. If we keep sticking to our rigid maximalist positions, then we will never reach a solution. So this issue of flexibility should be seen in that context. It cannot be unilateral, it cannot be one sided. It has to be by all parties involved.

If the Indian government says that there will be no change in its policy to Kashmir, will the peace process break down? Or will you continue with the confidence building measures?

I am afraid if there is no movement forward on Kashmir, then there can be no movement on Confidence Building Measures. There is no doubt in my mind that the core issue bedevilling relations between India and Pakistan is the Kashmir dispute.

But Pakistan is prepared to resolve all disputes in a sincere and honourable manner. But if this core issue is not being addressed and if India is intransigent and they say that is all, we are not moving forward, and this core issue is out, then all the issues are out.

Then effectively the peace process is being held hostage to this one issue?

No, it is not a hostage. The peace process is Kashmir. We are not fighting on the [inaudible] and Wular dams and Sri Creek.

But in terms of normalisation, easier access, trade - would you see that going forward?

Where there is hatred, when there is mistrust, how can we normalise? When you have cultural activites, these are between countries which have cemented friendly harmonious relations. How can you have trade relations, commerce, cultural activity between countries who are fighting wars and killing each other daily on the line of control. Isn't that very unnatural.? How is it possible?

Some people might say if there was movement on cultural exchanges, then there would be a better spirit of goodwill and it might be easier to resolve the Kashmir issue.

That is putting the cart before the horse. Anybody who is saying this, is not realistic.

Or they have ulterior motives of shelving the Kahsmir issue and just going ahead on culture and trade and commerce. I don't think it is practical..

After the revelations about Dr AQ Khan last February, he was put under house arrest, what is his position at the moment?

He has been pardoned. He is not under house arrest. But he is in Islamabad in his house. For his own security he is not moving much at all. But certainly the family is moving around, the children are going to school. There is no restriction on them at all. They can move around but in their own interests and for their own security, it is better that they stay in one place as much as possible.

But he is not permitted to make any statements?

There is already too much confusion. We would not like to any create more confusion by the media going in and interacting and then coming up with all kinds of stories.

There have been reports of his supporters infiltrating the police and armed forces.

I do not think he is into any extremist gangs. This is absolutely wrong.

Earlier you said that he could 'keep his money'. Is this still the position or are you making any effort to remove any funds that he managed to amass?

We don't know where his funds are.

Are you confident that there are no more leakages from AQ Khan's associates?

Until now whatever we have investigated, we are reasonably sure that this is it, that we have extracted all the intelligence from them. I can't guarantee that something more crops up. And we will again have to investigate and find out our involvement.

As far as our nuclear programme is concerned, we have put the best possible custodial measures protecting our installations. We have a National Command Authority, the highest body controlling our strategic assets, then there is a very well organised strategic planning division, headed by a very capable lieutenant-general who is looking after all our strategic assets.

As far as those assets are concerned, they are under very strong controls of the armed forces of Pakistan. Here we have created an Army Air Force Navy strategic forces command, commanding all these assets. So I think we are very well organised.

As far as our strategic organisation is concerned, the intelligence and security arrangements have been beefed up, they have been strengthened. All possible doubtful areas have been removed. I think we have taken tremendous action. I am very sure that there cannot be any proliferation, there cannot be any assets falling into wrong hands. I am very sure about that.

There have been two serious assassination attempts on your life recently - if a further attempt is successful, what measures have you taken for your successor so that the initiatives you have taken are carried forward?

No - I haven't taken any political measures, if you are talking of some kind of succession.

There is a political system in place. The Assemblies are functioning, the Senate is there. If I am not there, it is the chairman of the Senate who is the President of Pakistan until such time as the Assemblies elect a new President. The political institutions are in place to find a new President.

I don't see this an issue of succession, there is no monarchy going on. There is a parliamentary democracy in place and through the political and democratic system, a successor has to be found to everyone.

Is your alliance with the MMA pushing you in a direction you would prefer not to go ?

There is a total misperception. There is no alliance with the MMA. There was an agreement with the MMA on the Legal Framework Order. We reached an agreement with them and passed the LFO in the interests of bringing political stability with a two-thirds majority.

We could have reached an agreement with the Peoples Party but somehow they did not come forward. So we reached an agreement with the MMA and we put the LFO issue aside. Now they are in the opposition. The leader of the opposition is Fazul ur Rehman of the MMA

Do you think you will be able to move forward on women's rights?

I think on women's issues the vast majority in the assembly will support, I am very confident that these bills need to be drafted, hadood, blasphemy, honour killings, all these must be debated and we must bring in any change which is required, but without violating the Islamic tenets, but ensuring that no victimisation is done against anybody. Whatever elements of these issues are not in line with Islamic tenets should be removed or corrected. And we will do it.

Are you intending to honour your pledge to take off your uniform and step down as COAS ?

I will take a decision when we reach it. I will cross the bridge when we reach it. Or shall we put it like this, there is the 17th amendment which has been passed in which the Legal Framework Order is a part.

I will adhere to the 17th amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan. I will adhere to the Constitution of Pakistan. Having said that, my word that I gave - that I will remove the uniform- if the MMA is talking - because they are talking of the word, of the pledge, that I gave - they themselves have violated two pledges that they gave: firstly, to support my vote of confidence in the Assembly and the second was the National Security Council Bill, supporting that.

They backed out on both. And so therefore I have no qualms at all as far as my word to them. They have broken their word and so I am under no obligation of pleasing them. So that can be set aside.

Now the issue that has to be taken into account is: firstly, sticking to the Constitution, and secondly, the national interest. Now these are two issues which I need to consider seriously and then only will I reach a conclusion.

What about the pledge to the people?

Insofar as the people are considered, I know that the vast majority of people are alarmed at why did I give my word. The number of letters, telephone calls, and the number of people who have contacted me asking me why did I give my word to step down. There are a lot of people are pressurising me not to give my word. It has had an opposite effect that I should not have given my word.

When will a decision will be taken - perhaps in August?

I would not be able to comment, obviously it is closer to December. August is my birthday all right, but there is no link.

Would you consider stepping as COAS but retaining your military links by making yourself a Field Marshal like Ayub Khan?

I have no intention of assuming the office of Field-Marshal. It would not have a good impact at all. I do not want to promote myself.

What achievements are you most proud of in the four/five year period since you took power?

Economic revival, of course. Setting the economy - bringing health to the economy, that is the biggest achievement. - all the macro economic indicators, that is an achievement.

Secondly, I would like to comment on the local government - that is the greatest achievement I would like to convey to the Commonwealth, if they are talking about real democracy, which was not existing here. We were living in a colonial period where the people were governed by a Deputy Commissioner, one man, a bureaucrat, who used to be king in his district. We have broken that and made the people govern themselves. Now the DCO comes under the people's representative who is the Mayor or Nazem. Now this is our greatest achievement - introducing democracy at the grass roots level and empowering the people politically, administratively, financially.

This is the real development, the real future of Pakistan. There are also many other issues, emancipation of women...

Do you feel that Pakistan will be suspended again from the Commonwealth if you don't step down as COAS?

It's a pity if they do that. I don't accept any conditionality. Pakistan does not accept any conditionality. Pakistan should not be taken for granted. It is a pity and very saddening very annoying, when I see my country being taken for granted and conditions laid on it. This is just not on.

We will take our decisions in accordance with Pakistan's dictates and not according to the Commonwealth's dictates. If they can't understand what democracy is really in its holistic form, then they should leave Pakistan alone on deciding on what is the best form of democracy for us, and they should not base our inclusion into the Commonwealth on any future actions of mine.

How successful have you been in eradicating corruption, as you pledged four years ago?

Corruption has been checked in a very big way at the top level. The corruption of billions, the loot and plunder of banks, all banks were bankrupt, all our organisations, our corporations, PIA, steel mills were bankrupt because of the loot and plunder from the top. That has been stopped. That is our biggest achivement.

At a practical level, the lower level corruption continues and that has a lot to do with many issues, it certainly has a mindset, an attitude and a social problem. And the government structure, maybe the salaries are defective. It is a complex issue which leads to corruption at the lower level which we need to tackle. We have identified that the basis of corruption at a lower level is when a person's salary is not in consonance with what he needs and not sufficient to give him security for him and his family and his future retired life.

We have to make sure that the salary structure ensures these things. This is the root of the elimination of poverty and corruption at the lower level. At a higher level, where there is no reason for the person to be corrupt because they already have sufficient resources, punitive measures, very harsh actions are the only action because they don't deserve any sympathy.

Are you satisfied with your relationship with the United States? By your critics you have been called a puppet of the West.

We are very satisfied with our relationship with the United States. There is concern domestically with people thinking that we have become the puppet of the United States. That is not true at all. People who do understand do realise that.

Some politicians keep harping on this issue because they want to put me down on any issue which can be controversial. So we have got this issue of my being dictated by the United States, but we don't get dictated to by anyone. There are many areas where we have followed a different line from the United States (for example on nuclear issues, Iraq, the issue of handling terrorism in Pakistan, of handling al Qa'eda in tribal territory ).

We are following what we want, we are handling these issues in the interest of Pakistan; if our interests in this issue of handling terrorism is the same as US interests, then that is perfectly fine, and that is the case, what is in Pakistan's interest happens to be in US interest also, then we are acting in perfect cooperation and coordination.

Did the US want a more direct presence in tribal territory?

Initally they did. They thought we might not be able to handle. But that could not be allowed and we did not allow it

What about reports of American aircraft overflying Pakistani territory?

Unnecessarily they make an issue of these minor issues. Whenever there is a violation which can be totally innocent without knowing where the boundary is, because not everyone knows where the boundary is.

These are not deliberate violations. They are unintentional. We launch our complaints and protests; they normally apologise and say they will not do it again. So let's not create a problem out of of a very minor issue.

[ENDS]

Dawn [Pakistan]
June 19, 2004
PLURALISM AND QAZI HUSSAIN
By Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy

In summer 2001, while visiting the University of Maryland, I went to hear Qazi Husain Ahmad, Amir of the Jamaat-i-Islami, Pakistan lecture at the Brookings Institute in Washington DC. He spoke on Islam, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. What I heard both surprised and impressed me. Much of what Qazi sahib said was more or less along the expected lines - Islam being misunderstood in the West, unfair US embargoes upon Pakistan after the nuclear tests, the unwarranted hostility towards the Taliban (although he disagreed with their rejection of education of girls), etc. But the rest was refreshingly new and remarkably enlightened. In his opening remarks Qazi sahib praised the US for being a "pluralist" society where he could go to a mosque and freely proselytize, pointed proudly to his shalwar-kameez and declared he could dress as he pleased, and remarked that those of his family members who had migrated to the US felt quite at home. I had never heard him speak publicly in English earlier, nor had I expected such a sound appreciation from him of "pluralism" (a word that he repeated at least twice). In essence he had anticipated General Musharraf's celebrated "enlightened moderation" by three years. His acceptance of the fact that different groups within a society could accept a plurality of beliefs and philosophies, and still live in harmony, was welcomed by all. I left with a new respect for his values and skills, as did many others in the audience. It therefore saddened me to read Qazi sahib's article in Dawn (June 10, 2004) wherein he espouses values that stand diametrically opposed to those he declared at Brookings. This article apparently negates his former stand on pluralism and tolerance. Instead, he now adopts a menacing tone towards Ismailis, referring to them thrice as a "religious minority" without conceding that they are a Muslim sect. He darkly hints that they may meet the fate of the Ahmadis in Pakistan, and claims that there are deep conspiracies to undermine Pakistan by attempting to change the school curriculum "by taking over the country's education boards". It is important to put the record straight on the education issue, especially since this has become such an important issue recently. The fact is that none of Pakistan's 24 examination boards (referred to as "education boards" by Qazi sahib) is authorized to change the national curriculum. The Aga Khan board, if and when it becomes fully functional, will also fall in the category of the other boards in this respect and will be required by law to teach only those materials approved by the government. Thus Qazi sahib's claims are unsupportable. Indeed, by an act of parliament passed in the mid-1970s, only the Curriculum Wing of the Ministry of Education can prescribe what can be taught in Pakistan's schools. The spirit behind the legislation was to create a Pakistan that would stay together in spite of its religious, ethnic, and linguistic diversity. What happened, tragically, was very different. Under General Ziaul Haq, with full support from Islamic parties, ideologically charged individuals hijacked the Curriculum Wing. Over the years, they steadily converted Pakistani schools into zealot factories. Children were taught that heinous conspiracies explain the plight of Islam and Pakistan today, told to hate Hindus and non-Muslims, and have the desperation of the besieged. The curriculum required students to "collect pictures of policemen, soldiers, and National Guards", explained to them that the exercise of democracy was why East Pakistan had separated from West Pakistan, and gave them the notion that the "Ideology of Pakistan" stood for zero tolerance of dissent and diversity. In contrast with the relatively open-minded education during Pakistan's earlier years, schools bred ignorance and violence. Militant jihad became part of the culture on college and university campuses. Armed groups flourished, set up offices throughout the country, collected funds after Friday prayers, and declared a war without borders. Over time the Afghan-Soviet jihad metamorphosed into the Kashmir jihad, from there to the jihad of Sunnis against Shias and the jihad of Shias against Sunnis. Ultimately the sponsors of jihad - the Pakistani state and the army - fell victim to their own success. The attempts on the lives of top army commanders, suicide bombers, the violence in the Northern Areas over the issue of curriculum, and the Wana debacle, eventually convinced at least some people in the establishment that the time for change has come. To forestall that possibility, the MMA organized street rampages to ensure that General Zia's curriculum would not disappear. Feeling the heat, General Musharraf's minister of education, Zubaida Jalal, promptly declared herself a fundamentalist. Under pressure, the government has now withdrawn every little piece of moderation and good sense that had somehow crept into the curriculum. Although the MMA leaders are free to declare this as a minor victory, and a demonstrative example of how street power can make a weak government bend, one still hopes that they will look at the broader interests of the country. If Qazi sahib thinks that pluralism in the US is a good thing, then by extension it should also be a good thing for Pakistan. Teaching hatred and lies to the nation's children can only result in its future citizens being embittered, conspiracy-ridden, fearful, and traumatized. Although I agree with Qazi sahib's point that educating Pakistan's children should be our responsibility rather than that of the West, he appears rather dismissive about Pakistan's educational backwardness and the need for modernization. The only thing he appears to see is foreign donors frantically pumping money into the education sector for their "nefarious" ends. Whatever one may think of foreign aid, there can be little progress towards creating a modern Pakistan without a well-educated, scientifically literate, and technologically accomplished populace. It is impossible to do science with a medieval mindset, impossible to create functioning institutions when torn by sectarian conflicts, and impossible to effectively participate in today's globalized knowledge-based economy and culture. Not surprisingly, democracy steadfastly refuses to grow roots in Pakistan. The distance between India and Pakistan - already huge - threatens to grow even more. Finally, I cannot see why Qazi sahib chose to bring US foreign policy and Abu Ghraib into his article. This is not even a matter of debate - every person in Pakistan is deeply critical of American aggression in Iraq and Palestine. For that matter, the majority of people on this planet loathe George Bush's mad imperialism. But this does not mean that they want to opt for religious tyrannies. Indeed, the people of India booted out the BJP precisely for this reason. If Qazi sahib wishes for a prosperous and peaceful Pakistan - a country to which one's relatives might wish to immigrate into rather than emigrate out of - then he, better than anyone else, knows that pluralism and multiculturalism has to be the way. The writer teaches at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad and is the editor of "Education And The State - Fifty Years of Pakistan", published by Oxford University Press in 1997.

[ENDS]

The Daily Star [Bangladesh]
June 20, 2004
AN INTERVIEW WITH NAEEM MOHAIEMEN

'In Rangpur, they kidnapped and tortured 15 Ahmadiyyas, forcing them to do tawba and renounce Ahmadiyya Islam. What kind of Islam is this?' Naeem Mohaiemen is the New York-based director of Muslims or Heretics? a documentary about the persecution of Ahmadiyya Muslims. He previously co-produced Rumble in Mumbai, a documentary about globalization. Muslims or Heretics? screened for five weeks at different venues in Bangladesh and is presently screening at festivals in the US. The Daily Star's Zafar Sobhan recently caught up with Mr. Mohaiemen to ask him a few questions about the Ahmadiyya issue.

DS: What was your main intention with the film? What do you hope to accomplish?

NM: The main intention is to build up public opinion in Bangladesh against the government's ban on Ahmadiyya books. Our government must come to its senses and lift the ban. The government claims they imposed a ban for the sake of "law and order." Well, law and order has not been restored by this ban. The anti-Ahmadiyya group Khatme Nabuwot has actually increased its campaign since the ban. Now they have given a June 30 deadline of declaring Ahmadiyyas non-Muslim. They have also started calling themselves the "International Khatme Nabuwot" which makes you wonder who is funding them.

Khatme Nabuwot now has an executive committee with 33 members, which had pledged to go from village to village in Bangladesh until all 91 Ahmadiyya mosques are "liberated." In Rangpur, they kidnapped and tortured 15 Ahmadiyyas, forcing them to do tawba and renounce Ahmadiyya Islam. What kind of Islam is this? Did the Prophet Mohammed (SM) teach us to torture in the name of Islam? Khatme Nabuwot is perverting the meaning of Islam and giving a black eye to all Muslims. The government cannot be a passive spectator. They must step in and arrest the zealots of Khatme Nabuwot. And they need to take quick action to remove the ban.

DS: What sort of responses did you get at the screenings? Were audience members urging government action in this matter?

NM: One journalist made an excellent point at a screening at the Goethe Institute. He said, "Any time there is any sort of communal trouble, our liberal Muslim neighbors come forward and say, 'We will protect you.' But why should people need to protect people? That is the state's role. Only if the state mechanism is broken does this sort of 'people protecting people' need to happen." I agree with that sentiment. The state needs to play a positive role in safeguarding minorities. And the state has done that at times. When some major riots happened in India, the Bangladesh government played a positive role in making sure retaliation riots didn't happen here. But the state has failed in the case of Ahmadiyyas and given in to the extremists.

When the police and local administration takes take affirmative steps, such as in Barisal and Patuakhali recently, they have successfully stopped persecution of Ahmadiyyas. But for the most part, the government has not taken any steps to prevent attacks against Ahmadiyyas, and certainly they have not reversed the book ban. The problem is, this coalition government is beholden to both the Jamaat and the Islami Oikko Jote. The religious parties have cunningly decided that this is the issue they want to push. There are always political points to be scored by beating up on a minority. In Rangpur, for instance, the persecution has taken place in a constituency which is at present controlled by the Jatiya Party and has been targeted by the four-party alliance in the next election. The anti-Ahmadiyya campaign is their first shot at establishing a presence there with the ultimate goal of taking the seat.

DS: Recently [US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia] Christine Rocca visited Dhaka, and expressed concerns about the ban on Ahmadiyya books. What are your feelings about this sort of visit, especially since you live in the US?

NM: It actually infuriates me that the government will respond to US officials when they complain about this issue, yet we Bangladeshi activists have been protesting about this for over six months. The government doesn't feel any need to respond to domestic human rights activists. ASK and three other organizations filed a "Demand Of Justice" notice the day after the ban, but the government has yet to respond to that petition. Ultimately, Bangladesh's problems have to be solved by us. You can't solve these problems through external pressure. Even if external pressure causes something to happen, it is a temporary fix. We have to build up the infrastructure and support for human rights and tolerance from inside Bangladesh. Also, I don't want my work co-opted by those who would divide the world into "us and them." I am fighting religious extremists, but I don't consider Bush's "Pax Americana" project to be my ally.

DS: How does the Ahmadiyya issue intersect with your other work as a political activist?

NM: In the context of the US role in today's world, I am always interested in making linkages and parallels with other global situations. One of the things I have talked about at these film screenings is my own experience working with people like Blue Triangle and Not In Our Name in the US. These groups work to protect the civil rights of Muslim immigrants. In fact, Muslims are victims of the same racial profiling that tormented black Americans for decades. Now, in the post 9/11 hysteria, Muslims have become the new disenfranchised minority in America and Europe. Yet, in our own country where we Muslims are the majority, we do not hesitate to disenfranchise our own minorities. So, global activists cannot condemn only oppression against Muslim minorities in America. We have to speak out against oppression being carried out by our fellow Muslims. Otherwise it's a double standard.

DS: Any theories as to religious political parties and their sources of strength?

NM: One disturbing trend is that a lot of people in Bangladesh think the religious parties are the only ones resisting neo-imperialism. Therefore, they tolerate and quietly support the religious parties. I keep hearing how the mosques and religious parties in Dhaka brought out large rallies against the Iraq war. In fact, this is the failure of the Bangladesh left. Why couldn't they bring out massive rallies against the Iraq war? Kolkata had a very strong anti-war movement. They even mobilised a very successful boycott of American products. But the Kolkata left organized this, not the religious parties.

In fact, there are many ways to resist imperialism. In America, some of the strongest voices against the war have been families of GIs, Vietnam vets, labor unions, artists, musicians and black and Latino groups. So I have found other allies in the fight against imperialism, I don't feel any need to cozy up to the religious parties.

Zafar Sobhan is an Assistant Editor of The Daily Star.

[ENDS]

The News International
June 21, 2004
HUDOOD ORDINANCE
Farhatullah Babar

Last week General Pervez Musharraf once again called for a review of the Hudood laws saying, 'after all, these are man made laws and there is no harm in reviewing them'. It is yet to be seen whether the government will really do something to change the law.

The Hudood Ordinance was promulgated in from behind the back of the Parliament, without taking into account the views of the cross section of religious scholars and public opinion, and prescribes punishment which are not ordained by the Holy Qur'an and Islam.

The Ordinance has heaped shame and miseries on hapless women. Those opposing changes in it will be held accountable before both Allah and the bar of public opinion.

Besides many other lacunae, rajam or stoning to death for adultery as prescribed in the 1979 Hudood Ordinance, has nothing to do with Islam and the Holy Qur'an. It has only stolen the Islamic title of 'hadd' to make it appear as a law ordained by the Holy Qur'an.

There is not a single verse in the Holy Qur'an that prescribes the punishment of stoning to death for adultery.

Some people argue that rajam is sanctioned by what they claim to be the traditions and Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (SAW) and therefore, it is Islamic even if there was no mention of it in the Holy Qur'an. This amounts to asserting that even if an injunction has no basis in the Qur'an, it can still be enforced as Islamic just because in the view of some, it was in conformity with the Sunnah or some saying of the Prophet (SAW). If this argument is accepted, it would shake the very foundations of Islamic jurisprudence.

True, that it is obligatory for a Muslim to emulate and obey Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (SAW). However, there are huge differences on what constituted Sunnah. There are differences, not only between the Sunni and Shia accounts of Sunnah but also between the Qur'an, the Holy Prophet (SAW) and all his noble companions, on one side and the main body of the ulema of most of the sectarian varieties, on the other.

It is correct that the Qur'an prescribed punishment under the hadd for certain offences, but it is wrong to say that the punishment for adultery under the Hudood Ordinance 1979 was also Qur'anic.

A true believer is ordained to accept the Holy Qur'an by itself as a comprehensive and self-contained source of Islam, free of any ambiguity and inconsistency. This indeed is the command in numerous verses of the Holy Qur'an, such as "the Book explaining all things" (16:89), "...it contains a detailed exposition of all things," (12:111), it "makes things clear" (27:1), "a book consistent with itself" (39:23), "free of crookedness" (18:1) and "discrepancy" (4:82).

Allah and Holy Prophet (SAW) are uncompromisingly intolerant of the admissibility of any other formulation, even in a subsidiary role as a source of Islam. "In what exposition will they believe after Allah and His signs (the word and work of Allah)(45:6).

Any human formulation, which fails to measure up to the letter and spirit of the Qur'an, is not acceptable in Islam. On the other hand, any thing that lies within the ambit of the Qur'an is truly Islamic, no matter what its source or origin. Says the Qur'an, "If any do fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed, they are unbelievers" (5:47). And if any fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed, they are wrong-doers" (5:48).

The Qur'anic concept of Sunnah, the words and deeds of the Holy Prophet (SAW), therefore has no identity independent of the letter and spirit of the Qur'an. If it were so, the Holy Prophet (SAW) would not be commanded to say: "I hope that my Lord will guide me ever closer (even) than this to the right course" (18:24), or "ask forgiveness for thy faults" (40:55).

The contemporary Arab society was primarily oral. The Qur'an and the Holy Prophet (SAW), however, both uphold the superiority of the written over the oral word. That is why the Holy Prophet (SAW) dictated every revelation to a scribe for authentic record.

It is highly significant that the a man so meticulous in ensuring that Divine guidance be passed on correctly down to the last word, would ignore his personal sayings so completely, if in his view the same constituted, in any way, a separate, independent or a complementary source of Islam. He left behind not a single line in writing that could then or later be called his normative Sunnah.

The argument that rajam is part of Sunnah, and even if not ordained by the Qur'an, is Islamic, therefore, cannot be accepted.

The Hudood laws, authenticating rajam as Islamic, were rooted partly in General Zia's obsession with the so-called Islamisation, and partly in the devious scheme to co-opt the religious extremists to punish and banish democratic leaders.

Two separate commissions on the rights of women, each headed by, and including eminent jurists and religious scholars have held this view and demanded repeal of the Ordinance. They have not denied that Qur'an ordains hadd punishment for certain offences. But they do assert that the Ordinance made in the name of Islam and hudood by Zia has nothing to do with Islam, and must therefore be repealed.

The Hudood Ordinance punishes the victim even before an attempt is made to catch the real culprit. The women, even after proved to be innocent, have to live forever with the shame of infamy. This is murder of equity and justice that cannot be the purpose of any Islamic law.

Those religious elements who claim that rajam is Islamic, assert an exclusive right to interpret Islamic teachings. But this is not correct. Islam does not ordain that interpretation of its tenets is the prerogative alone of those wearing green turbans or black robes.

A resolution has been submitted in the Senate that states: "This House expresses the opinion that whereas Islam prescribes Hadd punishments for certain offences, the punishments under The Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979 are unIslamic"

How can the religious elements claim that those demanding a change in the law are guilty of the negating the Qur'anic injunctions? The enlightened elements within the religious parties must support this resolution. Also, the parliamentarians not belonging to the religious parties should prepare themselves for the debate and not abandon the field to those who claim sole monopoly of interpretation religious tenets.

The writer is a Senator

[ENDS]

Posted by: Awaaz / 7/03/2004 02:59:00 PM

Godhra compensation case adjourned till July 31

Ahmedabad, June 24. (PTI): A local court today adjourned till July 31 the proceedings in the compensation suit filed against Chief Minister Narendra Modi, and 13 others by the kin of two UK nationals killed in the post-Godhra communal riots in the State.
Civil Court Judge at Himmatnagar town in north Gujarat, M M Kayasth, who had directed the respondents to file their replies by today, adjourned the matter till July 31, after the two advocates, representing the 14 respondents, pleaded for more time to file their replies.

The three claimants, Sheeren Dawood and Samima Dawood -- who are the widows of two victims -- and Imram Mohammed Salim Dawood, a riot survivor, have sought damages to the tune of Rs 22 crores.

Advocate Sumit Shah, represented eight defendants including Modi, the then State Home Minister, Director General of Police, Home Secretary and others while advocate Rashmikant Pandya, appeared for the five accused for the murder of the UK nationals.

The respondents have been given time till July 31 to file their written statements after the advocates prayed for more time, Pandya told PTI over the phone here.

The victims -- two UK nationals Saeed Siddiq Dawood and Shakeel Abdul Haid -- were charred alive inside their vehicle and their driver was injured when a mob allegedly attacked them in the wake of the Godhra train carnage near Prantij while going to Surat from Jaipur on February 28, 2002.

[ENDS]

The Deccan Herald
June 28, 2004
DIALOGUE ON KASHMIR IN UK
Religion, ethnicity and goodwill
There was a healthy respect for religious, cultural and ethnic diversity at two conferences on Kashmir held in the UK
By Balraj Puri

Two parallel international conferences on the Kashmir issue held in London and Birmingham recently by the organisations based in Britain provided an opportunity to know their latest thinking on the subject as also of those who attended them from both sides of the LoC. The London conference was organised by the International Kashmir Alliance and attended by the Pakistan People's Party leader Benazir Bhutto and the Muslim League leader

and former minister Shafqat Mehmood from Pakistan, Justice Abdul Majid Malik, former chief justice of Azad Kashmir High Court from the Pak-held part of the state, Mirza Wajahat Hasan from Gilgit and Baltistan, a large contingent from Kashmir Valley which included National Conference delegation led by Farooq Abdullah and representatives of the PDP, a group from Jammu which included official spokesperson of the BJP, four members of the Panthers Party and one each from Leh and Kargil districts of Ladakh region, apart from expatriates from the state settled in the UK, including a few Kashmiri Pandits and a large number of Mirpuris from the Pak part of the state.

The Birmingham conference held, barely a week later on 6-7 June, had a nominal representation from the Indian part of the state but a larger representation from the other side and from Kashmiris settled abroad. Whosoever sponsored these conferences and whatever be their motives, one could discern realisation of new realities in the state amidst the usual rhetoric. Firstly, the fact that it is a plural, multi-ethnic, multi-regional and multi-religious state. At least five regions were clearly identified by most of the speakers, namely Kashmir valley, Jammu, Ladakh, "Azad Kashmir" and Gilgit Baltistan. The demand of each region for recognition of its identity received sympathetic attention. In particular the plight of Gilgit - Baltistan, which had lost its identity and was renamed as Northern Area was highlighted by Wajahat Hasan. The region where the state subject law has been repealed and which has no representation in the National Assembly of Pakistan; nor any democratic institution at local level was, according to Hasan, worse off than it was during the Maharaja's time.

Need for internal dialogue

The conference stressed the need for internal dialogue between people on either side of the LoC and belonging to various regional and ethnic identities to evolve a consensus on the future of the state. The idea was also mooted that before a discussion on the future of the state, the future of each region within the state should also be discussed. A plea was made for a democratic federal and decentralised set-up to reconcile divergent aspirations of different regions and communities and help in evolving a harmonious nature of the state which alone could aspire for a stable and satisfactory status. Otherwise a decision of the majority of various groups with conflicting urges and interests could not be called valid. For majoritarianism is a negation of democracy. The final declaration at the Birmingham Conference, too, assured protection to all ethnic, regional and religious communities of the state.

Secondly, the impact of 9/11 was widely recognised. The British MP from a constituency of predominantly Pakistani expatriates in the UK, Khalid Mehmood, urged the audience at Birmingham to realise that the world opinion no longer sympathises with the use of violence by the freedom movements.

He therefore advised the supporters of the Kashmir movement to highlight human rights violations by the Indian security forces to regain world sympathy. Many participants in that conference quoted figures from eighty thousand to one lakh Kashmiris who were allegedly massacred by the Indian forces. As a person who has been monitoring human rights violations on either side, I could also cite a series of incidents of mass killings by the militants of Hindus or Sikhs. There was obviously not much awareness about other incidents of mass killings by the militants. But none contradicted my suggestion to isolate the incidents of killing of unarmed and uninvolved innocent civilians whatever be their religious or political beliefs and raise a voice of protest jointly against that.

At the London conference where there were more persons who had first hand experience of the ongoing violence, its rejection was categoric. Even those who believed in an independent state had come to the conclusion that the role of the gun - and that too a borrowed one - to achieve their objective was over. The proposed opening of the Srinagar-Rawalpindi road was welcomed in this context. But the Mirpuri audience, in both the conferences, was more enthusiastic about my proposal to also open a road between Nowshera (on the Indian side) and Mirpur (on the Pakistan side), a distance of 25 miles, to enable people of the same ethnic stock on both sides of the LoC to meet each other.

Religious divisions opposed Both the conferences opposed division of the state on religious or ethnic grounds. In fact the factor of religion was downplayed in the discussion on the Kashmir problem; except for the issue of Kashmiri Pandits, whose right to return to their homes with full security was conceded.

However those who pleaded for a unified state did not spell out what would be its status vis a vis India and Pakistan. On the whole, there was a greater emphasis on starting a process than on final goals.

Those who claim to be better representatives of the people and suspect the bonafides of the sponsors of British conferences owe it to themselves and to the people of the state to initiate internal dialogue, at least on its Indian side, between different regions, communities and viewpoints. For nobody can claim to represent all the diversities of the state.

But there is hardly any dialogue not only among these diversities but also among the same ethnic and religious community. Unless a culture for dialogue and respect for dissent and diversity is restored, there is little scope for any headway towards a solution of the Kashmir problem.

[ENDS]

The Daily Star
June 29, 2004
Fundamentalists issue death warrant to 3 DU professors
Staff Correspondent

Islamist zealots have issued death sentence to three noted professors of Dhaka University (DU) accusing them of running anti-Islamic propaganda in the country.

The three receiving death sentences are Prof Muntasir Mamun of history department, Prof Humayun Azad of Bangla department and Prof MM Akash of economics department.

The Nastik Murtad Resistance Committee and Muslim Millat Shariah Council yesterday in a faxed message sent their "verdict" to different print media offices in the city. The organisations claimed the decision was made at a meeting at the DU Arts Building at 10:00am Saturday.

Maulana Zakaria, Maulana Ekaedullah, Maulana Keramat Ali, Maulana Abdul Jabbar, Mufti Saleh Ahmed and Maulana Mufti Kudrat-e-Elahi were present, the message said.

"If the three professors don't redeem themselves by September this year, they will be killed," the massage said.

Prof Azad yesterday said, "I'm concerned not only for myself but also for the country as fundamentalism is spreading its wing."

"The government should take stern action against the fundamentalists. If it fails to do so, it will come out one day that the government is harbouring Islamist bigots," he added.

"Most probably the al-Qaeda has set up its den in Bangladesh," Azad said, adding, "if so, then the country's image will be tainted."

South Asian People's Union against Fundamentalism and Communalism and Ekattarer Ghatak Dalal Nirmul Committee yesterday in a statement condemned the death threat and accused the government of spreading fundamentalism in the country.

"The prime minister will be held responsible if the three professors are attacked," the statement read.

They also urged the progressive political parties and common people to be united against the communal forces.

The signatories to the statement included Prof Kabir Chowdhury, Hena Das, poet Samsur Rahman, writer Shahrier Kabir, Prof Hasan Azizul Haq and journalist Kamal Lohani.

[ENDS]

The Hindu
June 29, 2004
Opinion - Leader Page Articles
Education: beyond review

By K.N. Panikkar

Even if the NCERT books are withdrawn, there is still a large space in which communal ideas have a free play.

IF THE Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) were to list its achievements during its five-year rule, the communalisation of education is likely to figure at the top. It is much more extensive and intense than what is apparent. Understandably, intellectuals and educationists have demanded that the damage done by the manoeuvres of the BJP-led Government be immediately repaired. How best this could be achieved is likely to engage the attention of the new United Progressive Alliance (UPA) Government as well as of the secular forces outside it. The initial response justifiably focusses on corrective steps, both in administration and policy. They are necessary, but not sufficient. For, the BJP and the agencies it promoted had set in motion a process aimed at altering the intellectual climate in educational institutions in favour of the communal. As a result, the sense of values, anti-humanist and anti-democratic, is likely to exercise abiding influence on future social consciousness.

The detoxification should, therefore, go much beyond rectification; it should involve a strategy to reverse the process itself. Given that the communal penetration is deep and pervasive it has intruded into almost all levels of institutional functioning, both in structure and ideology. The changes sought or implemented without taking into account this grim reality would at best touch only the tip of the iceberg. In the field of education, therefore, the new Government faces the task not of review and reform but of a reordering of the system in order to retrieve the earlier secular ethos, even when issues, which need urgent solution, are immediately attended to.

Restoring the secular ethos in education calls for a long, sustained and continuous effort. Inevitably, the communal distortions and misrepresentations in curriculum and content consciously incorporated by the BJP-led Government have to be addressed as a priority issue. The steps initiated by the UPA Government to address this task without delay by appointing a review committee to examine the history textbooks, which were at the centre of controversy during the last few years, is most appropriate. Yet it is necessary to take into account two important dimensions. First, the main objection to these books is not the factual errors they contain as many historians have tried to project. The factual errors are indeed deplorable. What is more disconcerting is the sense of values and the political and social vision they project. Secondly, the National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT) textbooks are prescribed only in a small number of schools. Being a government agency, its efforts to communalise the curriculum have attracted national attention and they are likely to be rectified through administrative intervention as the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) is currently engaged in. But a greater danger exists. Even if the NCERT books are withdrawn, there is still a large space in which communal ideas have a free play.

Let me give an example. A textbook prescribed for class six students in an ICSE school in Kerala is a biography of V.D. Savarkar written by an activist of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. It contains a quotation from Savarkar, prominently displayed in a full page, on Hindu rashtra as the ideal to strive for. In the same school, the biography of Vivekananda for students of eighth class is also written by an RSS activist. Similar examples are aplenty, particularly in the schools run by private foundations affiliated to the Sangh Parivar. A study of the textbooks prescribed in the schools run by Vidhya Bharati in Rajasthan would reveal how the free space permitted in the system is used for communalisation. What enables these schools to introduce communal reading material is the freedom they enjoy for choosing texts for specific areas, particularly for the study of regional languages. Through these manoeuvres, most of which have made great strides, unnoticed and undocumented, communalism has managed to strike deep roots in the educational system.

After all the NCERT textbooks are used only in a small number of schools. While exorcising the communal content from the NCERT textbooks is an urgent need, the space outside can hardly be left free for communalism to colonise. Just like the NCERT textbooks, these too not only distort and misrepresent or eliminate historical facts but also promote a communal conception of state and society. In the process, they foster in young minds a sense of values that contributes to the legitimacy of communal ideology.

The reputation of Government agencies such as the Indian Council of Social Science Research, Indian Council of Historical Research, NCERT, the University Grants Commission and so on were based earlier on their professional competence and the academic stature of those who headed them. In their roll call were some of the outstanding intellectuals of the country. G. Parthasarathy, Sukumoy Chakravarthy, D.S. Kothari, S. Gopal, Ravider Kumar and Nihar Ranjan Ray to mention a few from the distinguished list of people who are not with us today. Under the dispensation of the BJP, academic excellence was given the go-by in favour of allegiance to the Sangh Parivar. As a result, almost all of them came to be controlled either by those with a communal past or those who were willing to carry out the wishes of a Minister who relentlessly pursued his obscurantist and irrational convictions. In the bargain, these institutions have been deprived of their professional competence and character. The whims of the Minister and his political biases came to be writ large on almost all decisions of these institutions.

The communal influence was not limited to the upper echelons of these institutions. In almost all of them, a substantial section of the official hierarchy, either through intimidation or allurements, were recruited to the communal cause. This has happened across the board from research institutions in the cities to Ekal Vidhyalayas in tribal villages. As a result, these institutions as such have assumed a communal outlook and character. Like the fascist mentality persisting in society even after its overthrow the communal virus will continue to be present in them, even if a change is effected at the top. What is necessary is to flush out the communal poison from the body of these institutions.

The defeat of the BJP in the election of 2004 is not the end of communal ideology or the efforts to inculcate it in society. On the other hand, if the reports are true, communalisation through education is likely to intensify. The joint secretary-general of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, Shyam Gupta, recently stated that a project is on the anvil to reach out to 100,000 tribal villages through a four-point programme of education, health, economic progress and self-respect. As a part of this agenda, about 1.5 lakh single-teacher schools are being set up in tribal villages, with RSS cadres employed as teachers. Since there would be no government control over these schools, it is certain that they would indulge in the Hindutva's pedagogy of hate. It is no secret that the Sangh Parivar has already organised a parallel system of education through the schools controlled or managed by it. The addition of these new schools would further extend its reach as well as reinforce it.

Today the nation stands forewarned. Under the BJP-led Government the education system of the country had almost slipped into the darkness. Immediate steps are, therefore, called for from the Government to ensure that the past does not recur. At least three steps are urgently required. First, structural changes in the constitution of Government-funded institutions to ensure that their fundamental character and objectives are not subverted through administrative interventions. Secondly, introduction of academic control over all educational institutions so that the students are not subjected to the communal influence which militates against the fundamental principles of the nation such as democracy and secularism. Thirdly, a thorough review of the reading materials used in all existing schools and elimination of all that promotes communal consciousness.

The political commentators may quibble over the meaning of the mandate of 2004. Yet there cannot be any doubt that the outmoded and obscurantist educational policy of the BJP-led Government has made a substantial contribution to its debacle. The defeat of Murli Manohar Joshi, in fact, can be read as the popular verdict against the attempt to deprive education of its modern and progressive character and to impart communal and irrational content to it. That also underlines the responsibility of the UPA Government to restore and further the secular-democratic system of education.

(The author, historian, is Vice-Chancellor, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady, Kerala. [..].)

[ENDS]

[Posted on the 'mukto-mona' list Date: Wed Jun 30, 2004 5:24 am Subject: Recalcitrant mullahs and their fatwa against 3 DU professors

How dare the recalcitrant mullahs offer their fatwa against three very bright professors of DU?

By A.H. Jaffor Ullah

Things are for sure out of kilter in Bangladesh. Or else, how dare a bunch of obscure kathmullahs, muftis, and "practitioners of Islam" offer their fatwa against three very bright professors of Dhaka University? It is an insult to every sensible citizens of this impoverished nation of 140 million. The good sense has taken the back seat, undoubtedly.

The Internet was abuzz on June 29, 2004, when a barrage of e-mails crisscrossed the globe to reach many of us while bringing the ominous news. Many a newspaper in Bangladesh printed the news of the sensational fatwa in the front page to emphasize the gravity of the situation.

One leading English news daily from Dhaka blurted out, "Islamist zealots have issued death sentence to three noted professors of Dhaka University (DU) accusing them of running anti-Islamic propaganda in the country."

The three senior professors against whom the fatwa of death was announced are: Prof Muntasir Mamun of history department, Prof Humayun Azad of Bangla department and Prof MM Akash of economics department. I personally met Prof. M.M. Akash during 1998-99 when he visited the University of New Orleans. Once I told him about the danger that is lurking ahead due to rife Islamization of Bangladesh. Professor Akash was least perturbed by all this baneful development. He reasoned as follows, "The Jamaat hardly gets any vote; people don't trust them." I was adamant as I told him, "You wait and see what is in store for Bangladesh." After receiving this pernicious fatwa Professor Akash will have his second thought, I recon.

A confederacy of Islamic dunces comprising of Maulana Zakaria, Maulana Ekaedullah, Maulana Keramat Ali, Maulana Abdul Jabbar, Mufti Saleh Ahmed and Maulana Mufti Kudrat-e-Elahi gave the fatwa in a meeting that supposedly took place in DU's Arts Building at 10:00 am on June 26, 2004. A day later, a group claiming to be comprised of The Nastik Murtaad Resistance Committee and Muslim Millat Sha'riah Council started sending faxed message to various newspapers publicizing the fatwa. They wrote, "If the three professors don't redeem themselves by September this year, they will be killed."

All people should take this death threat very seriously. The government should have reacted instantaneously by condemning the fatwa against the three professors. But three days have passed by and we are yet to see any reaction from the government. What does this mean? It has not escaped anyone's attention that whatever the Islamists in Bangladesh do, the government remains reticent for quite a while. When the donor nations break the silence and ask the government some tough question about the wrongdoings of the Islamists, only then they break their silence but even then the reaction is all but a whimper.

In March and April 2004, in western districts of Bangladesh a man by the moniker "Bangla Bhai" and his group of Islamists unleashed a rein of terror while killing dozens of people. The government did not react at all while newspapers published color photographs of this "revolutionary" fundamentalist renegade along with some short interviews. The police were sidelined through order from Dhaka as "Bangla Bhai" and his cohorts rampaged the western districts. Now there is no trace of this man. He disappeared into the thin air a la Houdini's vanishing act! As a team of American investigators went to the western district to gather information about "Bangla Bhai," they were told that no such person had ever existed in that locality. The villagers are now manning the area looking for communists. The Americans won't mind the villagers' activity because in this post Cold War days, the Bangalees are still fighting the communists to maintain the Pax Americana.

Under these circumstances, nothing good could be expected from the four-party coalition government because of undue influence of Islamists over the Khaleda Zia Administration. Therefore, the civil society should come into the defense of the three "condemned" professors. At stake here is the civil rights of the professors. Lest we forget, Bangladesh's constitution gives personal freedom to the citizens to practice their own religion. If anyone wants to extol the virtue of secularism, then why should that bother the mullahs and muftis? In what way our majority religion is in danger. The mullahs and their cohorts have invoked a fourteen hundred year old dictum that tells the faithfuls how to take care of the dissidents. These practitioners of religion have all but forgotten that we live in the dawn of a new millennium. For haven's sake Bangladesh is not an Islamic country; at least not at this very moment. If the obscurantists want to offer fatwa, they had better change the constitution of Bangladesh.

I strictly recall that in January 2001, two Supreme Court justices in Bangladesh have given their verdict that there is no place for fatwa in this nation. Simply put; fatwa is beyond the realm of law. Immediately, some zealots offer fatwa to declare the two respected judges to be murtaad or apostates. The government of Bangladesh then headed by Sheikh Hasina just sat quietly without bringing the fatwa-givers to justice. In other words, the government does think that these are pranks. Likewise, the Khaleda Zia Administration will also do nothing against the mullahs and muftis who offered their fatwa against the three professors.

My fervent request to the government is the following: please arrest these bunch of mullahs; let the law of the land work unhindered. These mullahs have violated the civil rights of three professors' and they should have to pay for their infraction of law. Bangladesh is still governed by a set of civil laws that are not in conflict with the constitution of the nation.

As I see it, the mullahs in question are in violation of the law. They should be apprehended right away; and the law should run its course with due diligence.

(Dr. A.H. Jaffor Ullah, a researcher and scientist, writes from New Orleans, USA)

[ENDS]

Human Rights Commission of Pakistan
Press Release
PESHAWAR ATTACKS THREATEN CIVIL LIBERTIES

Lahore, 2 July 2004 : LAHORE, July 2, : The raid by a provincial minister of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) government, along with police, on at least a dozen private homes in Peshawar, on the grounds that 'immoral activities' were taking place there, amounts to a highly dangerous infringement of the basic liberties, privacy and self-respect of citizens.

The reports that several individuals, a number of them women, have been detained after the raids are all the more disturbing. It has not been mentioned what crime these persons may have been involved in, or why a high-profile raid was carried out against them.

The incident comes as a part of a rising environment of repression and harassment in the NWFP. Reports of efforts to muzzle dissent and prevent discussions on issues of crucial national significance, are also extremely alarming.

The situation is one that poses immense threats to activists, and indeed all citizens. It is crucial that the authorities take action under the law to protect people from unlawful intimidation and intervention in their lives, as well as to protect those speaking out for the rights of vulnerable groups, including women and non-Muslim citizens.

Tahir Mohammad Khan Hina Jilani Chairperson Secretary-general

[ENDS]

Secular Perspective
July 1-15, 2004
AFTER ABOLITION OF TRIPLE TALAQ - WHAT NEXT?
by Asghar Ali Engineer

The Muslim Personal Law Board (MPLB) has taken bold decision to review practice of triple talaq at one go in its next meeting in July in Kanpur. The Board undoubtedly deserves congratulations from all those who are committed to women's rights and had been campaigning for this essential reform. Hundreds of Muslim women have suffered because of this pre-Islamic practice which, came back into Hanafi and Shafi'I Islamic law for reasons not to be gone into here.

It is unfortunate that the Sunni Barelvi ulama have threatened to launch an agitation if MPLB approves of abolition of triple divorce. They maintain that though it is bid'ah (i.e. sinful form of divorce) nevertheless once pronounced thrice it is valid. They have stated nothing new. It was because of this view by the Hanafis that triple divorce was practiced so long in India though it was abolished in most of the Muslim countries. The Barelvi threat should not deter the members of MPLB from abolition of triple talaq though the Board would like to evolve a consensus on the matter. It would be better if the MPLB persuades the Barelvis to agree.

It would be better if such consensus is worked out as Barelvis are in majority and if they do not agree the abolition of triple talaq by the Board may not be very effective. An overwhelming majority of Muslims in India follow the Barelvi School. It is also important to note that unless it takes the form of legislation it may not be effective if triple divorce is challenged in the court of law.

Suppose despite the MPLB abolishing it if someone pronounces triple divorce it will remain valid in the court of law unless it is abolished by law. Thus what MPLB has to do is to prepare a draft and give it to the Government to enact it. And as we have pointed out in our last article (See Secular Perspective 16th to 30th June, 2004) such a precedent already exists and the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act was drafted by the ulama led by Maulana Ashraf Thanvi and others and enacted in 1939.

But if such an exercise is undertaken by the MPLB it has to be quite comprehensive. There is great need for codification of Muslim Personal Law today. It should be done as early as possible. What is known as Muslim personal law today, it is interesting to note was known as either as Anglo-Mohammedan Law during the British period or simply as Mohammedan Law and was enacted by the British. But after independence the terminology changed and the Anglo-Mohammedan Law, in order to wipe out its colonial stamp, came to be re-named as Muslim Personal Law. However, its contents did not change.

Thus mere change in its terminology was a political act, not a harbinger of social change as in other Muslim countries. To de- colonise its name is not enough, one must do-colonise it content wise as well. During the colonial period women were not supposed to play an active role in socio-political matters, at least among Muslims though there were exceptions like Bi Amma (Mother of Ali Brothers) and many other women who played important role in freedom struggle.

But now 56 years after independence much water has flown down the Ganges and Muslim women are also in the forefront of many social movements. They are far more conscious today than they were during the colonial period. It is after great deal of efforts that the MPLB has agreed to abolish triple divorce. Very important as this measure is, it is not enough. There is crying need for a comprehensive legislation to be drafted under the guidance of MPLB by the ulama and Muslim intellectuals and lawyers.

As I have often pointed out Islamic law is so progressive that it can become basis for a Uniform Civil Code. However, conservative Muslim society dragged the Qur'anic pronouncements to its own level and introduced, through human reasoning many measures, which curbed women's rights. Despite reforms in other Muslim countries women have not got full measure of equality, which the ulama theoretically concede. Iniquitous measures vary from country to country,

In Saudi Arabia, for example, women are not allowed to drive and they are jailed if they drive. In Kuwait until recently women were not allowed to vote and had to wage struggle for years before this right was conceded recently. There is debate raging in Saudi Arabia as to why women cannot drive while they can drive in other countries. Obviously issues like driving and voting were not in existence in early Islamic period. It is the ulama in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait who, using their own reasoning prohibited for women. And now women are waging struggle in these countries against these measures and ulama are opposing it saying it is 'sin' for women to drive or vote.

In many other Islamic countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan and Iran women drive and vote without any religious constraint. Qur'an is the only unanimous divine source for Muslims and it remains most progressive in respect of women's rights. Ideally it grants equality between man and woman and should be the main source of legislation about women's rights.

The past interpretations of the Qur'an were constrained by socio- economic conditions and should not be binding on the present and future generations of Muslims. All great Islamic thinkers have repeatedly made this point and have accepted the central role of ijtihad (creative interpretation). It is only our social conservatism, not lack of theological sanction, which prevents our ulama from exercising it.

The attacks on Muslim identity by the Sangh Parivar also have been one of the reasons for resistance to any change. These attacks may continue and demand for Uniform Civil Code persist and find legitimacy if there is no initiative for change. Its attacks may even continue after such initiative. Our initiative for change is not motivated or restrained by these attacks. It should be based on the merit for change. Muslim women should not suffer and should get justice.

My plea with MPLB and concerned Muslim intellectuals is to initiate measures for drafting a comprehensive law duly codified which will embody the Qur'anic spirit. Triple divorce and unregulated polygamy has often been the cause of attacks on otherwise quite progressive Islamic personal law. Polygamy may not be abolished completely but strictly regulated as directed by the Qur'an. In fact both the verses on polygamy i.e. 4:3 and 4:129 should be read together to understand the real Qur'anic intent. Even the first verse i.e. 4:3 requires rigorous justice to all wives and ends by warning that 'if you cannot do equal justice then marry only one'.

The second verse i.e. 4:129 makes it clear that equal justice is humanly impossible and do not leave the first wife in suspension. With such warnings polygamy should not be practiced unregulated. All other Muslim countries except Saudi Arabia and Kuwait have introduced strict measures to regulate it. Thus a draft law should introduce such regulatory measures and specify circumstances in which one could take second wife as has been done in Pakistan. Those circumstances could be when the first wife is terminally ill, or medically proved to be infertile or barren and that too with the permission of the first wife and the court of law.

Today, though by no means polygamy is widely prevalent among Muslims (it is much more among Tribals, Dalits and upper caste Hindus), still one finds cases of desertion of first wife and marrying another without giving justice to the first wife. This should not happen and this is strictly prohibited by the Qur'an. The Qur'an permitted polygamy to help women in distress like widows and orphans, not to do injustice to them. It is the duty of the ulama to educate Muslims in this respect.

Thus there is crying need for a new draft law which the MPLB can draft with the help of Muslim lawyers and intellectuals incorporating all these changes and ask the Government to enact it. If it is properly drafted I am sure, it will become a model law for others to follow as in Islamic law women enjoy all the rights which modern laws have given to women like widow remarriage, compulsory arbitration before divorce, inheritance, right to property, right to earn and so on. And all these rights are unconditional and a wife also has right to lay down conditions at the time of marriage.

As such a law may take time since it is not easy to develop a consensus due to sectarian differences, the Board in the meanwhile should launch an awareness campaign against misuse of polygamy etc. it should also see to it that the amount of mahr paid is substantially high (part of which can be deferred) to discourage easy resort to talaq. The Qur'an itself encourages high amount of mahr. And mahr is woman's own untrammelled right. In case of divorce it can provide her with a measure of economic security. It is regrettable that in some Muslim communities mahr is only nominal and as low as Rs. 41 or Rs. 51.

In all these matters MPLB can play an important role as it has come to be acknowledged an authoritative body and in a sense representative too. Though it is understandable that it cannot rush into things, it can certainly cautiously proceed further leading the way. If the women suffer after all half the umma suffers and Qur'an does not admit injustice in any case.

Centre for Study of Society and Secularism Website:- www.csss-isla.com

[ENDS]

Indian Express
July 02, 2004
TALAQ TROUBLE: JAVED AKHTAR SLAMS MUSLIM BODIES
Press Trust of India

Mumbai, July 2: Renowned film writer Javed Akhtar has flayed Muslim organisations for sharply reacting to the reported move of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) to scrap the triple talaq (divorce) practice that empowers Muslims to provide instant divorce to wives.

Akhtar, who heads a progressive minority organisation, Muslims for Secular Democracy (MSD), has said apart from rejecting the instant talaq practice, the AIMPLB should also introduce a new 'nikahnama' that provides more security to the womenfolk.

The Board should also pursue with the government to amend the existing law that prohibits Muslim women (like all other women) from inheriting agricultural property, Akhtar told reporters here.

The MSD was categorical to clarify that it has decided to come in support of the AIMPLB on the talaq issue since it was a 'progressive step', although the Board has no statutory legal status.

[ENDS]

The Times of India
July 2, 2004
Don't change laws on talaq: Ulema Council

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ THURSDAY, JULY 01, 2004 12:01:33 AM ] MUMBAI: The Ulema Council has warned the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) against "wrongly interpreting'' shariat laws pertaining to talaq (divorce).

The council, which held an emergency meeting here on Wednesday, said Koranic laws are complete in themselves and "any effort to change them under the guise of reinterpretation will be met with stiff resistance by the community''.

Maulana Abdul Quddus Kashmiri, vice president of the council, told newspersons that the utterance of the word talaq thrice could be done over a period of time.

"When talaq is uttered the first time it is called talaq-e-rajie and it is followed by talaq-e-baien and the final one is called talaq-e-mugalazza. If talaq is uttered the third time, the divorce is final.

"Those misusing this provision deserve to be condemned since they are acting against the spirit of Islam. But that does not give the right to anyone to declare a divorce invalid just because the word talaq was uttered thrice in quick succession,'' said Maulana Kashmiri.

He observed that a Muslim organisation, Ahle Hadees, held a different opinion in this regard.

"We are willing to engage Ahle Hadees in a debate. But its leaders are unwilling to discuss the matter.'' Maulana Syed Moinuddin Ashraf said no organisation in the world, including the AIMPLB, had any right to alter the shariat.

According to him, an opinion was being created that the shariat did not give Muslim women their due. "The fact is that Muslim women enjoy a high degree of freedom and respect. Islam looks down upon anyone who does not respect and support his family members.''

The Ulema Council and other Muslim organisations like the Raza Academy are awaiting the decision of the working committee of the AIMPLB, which is scheduled to meet on July 4 to take a decision on the proposal which seeks to nullify instant talaq and lays emphasis on reconciliation between husband and wife.

Said Syed Noori of the academy, "We are in touch with likeminded organisations across the country. If the board goes ahead with the proposal then a nationwide agitation is on the cards.''

[ENDS]

JUNE 30, 2004
SABRANG ALERT * SABRANG ALERT * SABRANG ALERT

Dear Friends,

The intolerance of the fanatic strikes again. Activists owing allegience to the BJP attacked the offices of the Marathi eveninger, Mahanagar and manhandled senior journalists, Yuvraj Mohite, Jayesh Shirsat and Vaishali Rode. The chowkey of the Mumbai police located right opposite the newspaper's office but police personnel did nothing to intervene or stop the attack. Mahanagar has been known for its fearless strugg;le against intolerance and has been attacked over half a dozen times with it's fearless editor, Shri Nikhil Wagle been physically attacked more than once. Today's attack appears to be a cynical and sinister build-up to the elections due in Maharashtra. Furious with the verdict of the people that has thrown the BJP out at the Centre, the intolerant followers are trying desperately to whip up communal sentiments.Citizens, journalists and all right thinking persons must not only condemn the attack but write protest letters to 1) Maharashtra Chief Minister Shri Sushilkumar Shinde 2) Commissioner of Police, Mumbai 3) Press Council of India

Teesta Setalvad Javed Anand

BJP goons attack Mahanagar

On 29th of June at 3.30 pm BJP youth wing activists attacked the office of Mahanagar daily in Mumbai. Shouting abusive slogans and hurling BJP flags they stormed into the office searching for the editor, Mr. Nikhil Wagle. Since Mr. Wagle was not in the office, they ransacked the furniture in the advertising department and threw files all over. They manhandled senior journalists Yuvraj Mohite and reporter Jayesh Shirsat. Assistant editor Vaishali Rode was abused in filthy language. They blackened the signboard of the office. Shockingly, this incident took place in front of police chowky situated right opposite the office. The police did nothing to stop the attackers and arrived only after the damage was done. A complaint has been lodged at Mahim police station. Minister of state for home Mr. Kripashankar Singh visited Mahanagar and assured quick action. Additional Commissioner of police Vinod Lokhande and DCP Mr. Bishnoi also inspected the sight of the incident. The BJP goons were objecting to an article published in Mahanagar on Saturday, 26th June. It was an experience narrated by renowned writer Chandrakant Bhandari about the growing trend of visiting prostitutes in Warkari Sampraday that goes to Pandharpur for Ashadhi Ekadashi. BJP workers were also angry about the Ishrat Jahna encounter coverage of Mahanagar. They accused Mr. Wagle of being pro Muslim and anti national. According to Mr. Wagle the Pandharpur article is not the real reason for the attack. BJP is angry with the media after the defeat in Loksabha elections. They wanted an excuse to vent out their frustration and Mahanagar became a soft target. Mr. Wagle accused that some senior BJP leaders are behind the attack and demanded immediate action against all culprits.

[ENDS]

FILM SCREENING
Ayodhya to Varanasi: Prayers for Peace
Dir.Suma Josson, India, 2004, 60 mins
Saturday, 3 July, 2pm ICA Cinemas, The Mall, London Box Office: 0207 938 3647 Full Price £6.50, Concessions £5.50, ICA Members £4.50

While far-right Hindu political groups and parties have used and distorted religion in India, this film gives a voice to Hindu religious leaders who have opposed the destruction of the Babri Masjid and the agitation to build a Hindu temple in its place. Travelling through the countryside from Ayodhya to Varanasi the film also highlights the existence of a culture shared by Hindus and Muslims in the region. Screening followed by Discussion with South Asia Solidarity Group Details: 0207267 0923 or email sasg@southasiasolidarity.org

[ENDS]

Dear Friends,

I am sure all of you must have followed the kind of work ANHAD ( Act Now for Harmony and Democracy) has done since its inception in March 2003.

We have finally got a breathing time, when we can continue the struggle against the ideology of hatred. WE firmly believe that the Hindutva forces are out of the government but it is a very long ideological battle before we can even think of taking a rest.

Anhad plans to continue our work of peace education to combat hatred , specially from the minds of the young.

Anhad as you know does not take foreign funds but we need other help, which perhaps some of you might be able to extend.

We do a lot of travelling and are constantly on the road, organising workshops , film shows, trainings for activists, students, political workers, teachers.

We are planning to intervene in the formal school system in a major way during the coming months. We plan to extend our work to 10 states over the next few months.

Anhad urgently require two laptops , one multimedia projector projector and 5 vcd players, 2 more computers for the office, one mini DV player, camera pd180.

We would appreciate if these can be donated. And since people constantly keep coming from US and other countries they can send the same to us through someone or the other.

Anhad also requires desparately a vehicle, which costs around 5.5 lakhs.

Sincerely

Shabnam Hashmi

[ENDS]

Posted by: Awaaz / 7/03/2004 02:57:12 PM

Blasphemy law case: Samuel faces trial under Section 295 of PPC
* CLAAS files petition against Kot Lakhpat jail superintendent
By Waqar Gillani and Zainab Khar
Daily Times
May 27, 2004

LAHORE: Samuel Masih, 27, a suspect in a blasphemy case, who is in critical condition at the Lahore General Hospital after a police constable hit him on the head with a brick cutter, has been charged under Section 295 of the Pakistan Penal Code, which carries a maximum sentence of up to two years.

According to the first information report lodged against Samuel, he littered the wall of Darul Islam Masjid in Lawrence Gardens on August 23 last year.

Chaudhry Muhammad Yaqoob, librarian of the Darul Islam, who lodged the FIR stated: ìI work as the chief librarian at Idrae Darul Islam in Jinnah Garden. I was sitting in the mosque and was reciting the Quran. I saw a stranger, whose name was later found out to be Samuel, the son of a man named Emanuel, spitting on the mosqueís wall where the mosqueís plaque is placed. I stopped him from doing so. Qari Riffat and Darul Islamís library assistant Muhammad Aslam also saw this.î

There are four sections of the PPC, which provide punishment for a person accused of blasphemy: Sections 295, 295 A, B and C. Section 295 says that the punishment of a person could be extended to a maximum of two years or a fine or both if he defiled a place of worship with the intent of insulting the religion of any class.

The Centre for Legal Aid Assistance and Settlement (CLAAS), a non-government organisation working for minority rights, has been pursuing the case since August 23 last year. The NGO said it was the second case of its kind in which Section 295 of the PPC was imposed. Samuel was sent to Kot Lakhpat jail for trial.

Samuel was suffering from tuberculosis and had to be admitted to Gulab Devi Hospital on Friday, May 21 after a TB attack in jail. The next morning, Constable Faryad Ali reportedly attacked him with a brick cutter in the presence of another guard. ìI wanted to earn a place in heaven by killing him,î is what constable Ali is reported to have said. Samuel was subsequently transferred to Lahore General Hospital.

CLAAS has filed a writ petition in the Lahore High Court against the Kot Lakhpat jail superintendent and Dr Sikandar, who were in charge of the emergency ward when Samuel was admitted after being reportedly hit over the head by a constable. The NGO has questioned how the accused was attacked even in police custody. The court will hear the petition on June 2. Samuel was still in serious condition under police custody when this report was filed. The police have barred visitors and his relatives were reportedly refused permission to see him on Wednesday. Constable Ali, who attacked Samuel on May 22, was sent to jail after a case was registered against him.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistanís fact-finding team, CLAAS and other NGOs have declared the incident an example of the misuse of blasphemy law.

ìA third person, who did not know about the case, assumed Samuel was a blasphemy culprit and attempted to murder him,î said Joseph Francis, the CLAAS coordinator. He said the government should revise the blasphemy law.

Waseem Anthony of the Commission for Peace and Human Development said the life of citizens was at stake due to the abuse of blasphemy laws in Pakistan.

Samuelís younger brother Sarwar told Daily Times they were told about the incident two days later. He said the whole family was dependant on Samuel. Samuel was whitewasher, said Sarwar. He said that Samuelís became mentally unstable after the death of their mother and he was not in his senses when he left home on August 23. ìThe day when this incident happened, Samuel left home in anger because he had a fight,î he said.

[ENDS]

Los Angeles Times [USA]
21 May 2004
COMMENTARY
Religious Sword Over Pakistan
By Mahnaz Ispahani

This month in Karachi, Pakistan, at least 14 Shiites were killed and more than 100 were severely wounded while at prayer. Scores more were massacred by Sunni militants in Quetta earlier this year. In the last decade, more than 1,200 people have died in Shiite-Sunni violence. Today, sectarian dispute is Pakistan's Achilles' heel, challenging the officially sanctioned "Islamic" state - and endangering the country's future.

If Pakistan is to survive, Sunni extremists - who advocate violent anti-Shiism and an exclusionary form of Islam - must be brought down. It is not enough for President Pervez Musharraf to seek the capture of foreign jihadists from Al Qaeda and the Taliban. He must aggressively fight homegrown militancy. That's what it will take to make Pakistan the "liberal, tolerant, progressive, dynamic and strong Islamic state" that Musharraf proposes, and millions of ordinary Pakistanis insist that it can be, rather than a militant's paradise.

Pakistan's founder, Mohammed Ali Jinnah, was a Shiite, as were several others who helped him create the new homeland for Muslims. Many Shiites continue to serve and lead Pakistan. They are Islam's and Pakistan's largest religious minority, making up about 30 million of the nation's 148 million people. Yet today they live in escalating terror.

Their crisis is Pakistan's, emerging from three reinforcing developments. The first is the "Islamization" of laws, army and society begun by President Gen. Zia ul-Haq in the 1980s. The second is the largely unchecked and growing prowess of Sunni extremist groups in their war against Shiites. For them Shiites are "kafirs," or infidels. The third is the persistent pressure since Pakistan's creation for ever-purer Islamist politics by the religious political parties, which today are key players in parliament and control the strategic Northwest Frontier Province.

Before Zia put his puritanical religious lens on Pakistani public life, small-scale Shiite-Sunni disturbances flared occasionally but were largely considered law-and-order problems.

In Zia's time, however, the state itself became a sectarian player, espousing particular Sunni schools of Islamic law. Shiites then organized to resist these laws, which are unacceptable to their traditions. A segment became radicalized, leading to an increase in tit-for-tat violence between Sunnis (supported by Saudi Arabia) and Shiites (supported by Iran).

Today, while extremist Shiites try to retaliate against their enemies, it is mostly ordinary Shiites who die at the hands of groups espousing an anti-Shiite ideology of "kill the infidels." These same groups are jihadist and pair their deadly pursuit of Shiites with regional and global terror activities. Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, the group suspected in many Shiite massacres, is pro-Taliban, has links to Al Qaeda and is reported to have played a role in the 2002 killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. Strategic assaults have been launched across Pakistan against Shiite doctors who ministered in their communities and on Shiite men, women and children inside houses of worship and on busy streets. Prominent Shiites move around with armed bodyguards.

The roots of this crisis of Muslim identity go back even further than Zia's days, to the 1950s, when the leadership of Pakistan's most organized, urban religious group, the Jamaat-e-Islami, and other like-minded parties began to use Islam to foster exclusionary politics and public riots by politicizing the question, "Who is a Muslim?"

The Jamaat led a successful movement to have the small Ahmediyya sect - which is doctrinal anathema to the Jamaat - declared non-Muslims by the state. In 1974, the then-secular and politically weak Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto obliged it with a constitutional amendment. Then, in 1984, Zia made it a criminal offense for Ahmedis to even call themselves Muslims.

With the ouster of the Ahmedis from the fold, the tone was set for progressively more intolerant politics.

Today, a member of parliament can comfortably call a Shiite an infidel. The Sunni extremist Azam Tariq was infamous for his anti-Shiite violence. Yet he could flourish, winning a national assembly seat several times - most recently in 2000 - from his jail cell while facing dozens of criminal charges. He became an ally of the pro-Musharraf parliamentary party. Two days before he was assassinated, he told the New York Times - in his most moderate mien - that Shiites need not be killed; rather they "should merely be declared non-Muslims and jailed for 10 or 15 years."

Even as Musharraf bans certain groups and speaks out against sectarian violence, the militants flourish and the number of dead rises. One wants deeds as unflinching as his words. Only if he is able to put a full stop to the kind of Islamization that makes a mockery of an inclusive Muslim homeland; only if he eliminates the sectarian-jihadi complex that feeds off Shiites and other minorities' lives, only then will Pakistan have a secure future.

If Musharraf fails, then the question, "Who is a Pakistani Muslim?" could destroy all hope for a more progressive and peaceful Pakistan.

Mahnaz Ispahani is a senior fellow for South and West Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations.

[ENDS]

The Daily Star [Bangladesh]
May 30, 2004
Editorial

Ahmadiyyas under siege in Chittagong Going from bad to worse The International Khatme Nabuyat Movement took its anti-Ahmadiyya agitation to Chittagong on Friday, with hundreds of stick-wielding demonstrators besieging the city's Ahmadiyya mosque, and reiterating their demand for Ahmadiyyas to be declared non-Muslims by the government. Once again, the local authorities caved in to the mob pressure and agreed to hang a sign "warning" Muslims that the mosque was an Ahmadiyya place of worship and should not be mistaken for a Muslim mosque.

Let us repeat this point. The sign was hung up by the police. The police claim to have done so in order to maintain the peace. Thus, in the name of "maintaining the peace" the government has been a party to the continuing stigmatisation and marginalisation of the Ahmadiyyas.

It is interesting that the government is forever bemoaning the image problem that Bangladesh suffers from, and castigates the media, the opposition, and even watchdog international organisations for contributing to this negative image which is so harmful for the country.

It does not seem to occur to the government that nothing anyone else can say or do could possibly harm our image as a country more than this kind of religious intolerance that it not only eschews but also condones. There is simply no place for this kind of obscurantist and reactionary religious repression in the Bangladesh we are professing to want to create. The world, even we have come too far to permit ourselves to revert to this kind of backwardness.

The government owes an explanation to all of us as to where it stands with respect to safeguarding the constitutional right to freedom of religion.

If in a nation of 130 million people we cannot afford to give space to one lakh Ahmadiyyas because of the sectarian orthodoxy of a handful, who do not care for civic peace and law and order, what kind of a signal are we putting across in terms of both governance and our credentials as a moderate Muslim country? Certainly nothing to be proud of.

[ENDS]

The Daily Star May 30, 2004
Ahmadiyya Mosque S Asian body Protests change of signboard
DU Correspondent

The South Asian People's Union against Fundamentalism and Communalism yesterday protested the change of signboard of Ahmadiyya community's 90-year-old Baitul Baset Mosque by police following demands of 'extreme fundamentalist force'.

A statement signed by the organisation's President Prof Kabir Chowdhury and Member Prof Muntasir Mamun said the BNP-Jamaat alliance government is patronising the Islamist outfit, International Khatme Nabuyat Movement (IKNM), like the Jagrata Muslim Janata Bangladesh led by its operations commander Bangla Bhai, trampling human rights and democracy.

Police are helping the Islamist force as they are helping Bangla Bhai's men in the northern districts, the statement said and added Bangladesh is going under a Taliban-like rule.

The statement urged the conscious citizens and progressive political parties to get united to resist the religious extremists.

[ENDS]

The Daily Times
May 31, 2004
Editorial
SECTARIANISM STRIKES AT THE TOP

Someone has killed Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai, chief of the great Deobandi madrassah in Karachi, clearly in revenge for the suicide-bombing of city's Haideri Masjid where 18 Shias died earlier in the month. The police in Karachi, one of whose constables blew up the Haideri Masjid, is silent about the motivation of the killing, but that is quite 'normal' with a department whose personnel have been involved in assassination attempts on General Pervez Musharraf himself. Mufti Shamzai was going from his Banuri seminary to his house right across the road when killers on a motorbike shot him dead. His son, nephew and a driver were injured. Two police guards, which he did not think much of, were nowhere around. Everyone knew that he was a target, yet nothing could be done to save him. Deobandi students of the Banuri Masjid came out on the roads in many parts of Karachi and indulged in angry vandalism, once again making a show of strength in a city already harassed by violence. They destroyed the police station in Banuri Town, making the police force run for their lives, and torched a number of vehicles. The violence recalls the anarchy witnessed when a few years ago another Banuri Town religious personality, Maulana Yusuf Ludhianvi, was done to death after his sectarian campaigns. The office of the newspaper 'Business Recorder' was gutted among other acts of destruction of property. No one knows who killed Mufti Shamzai but one can recall an earlier sequence of violence. Last year, massacres occurred in quick succession in Quetta and Karachi, targeting the Shias. When the government as usual was unable to apprehend the culprits, the killers struck in Islamabad and shot dead Maulana Azam Tariq, leader of the banned-for-terrorism Sipah Sahaba, along with his official bodyguards. Mufti Shamzai was head of the Banuri complex in Karachi. He was rated the most powerful man in Pakistan during the Taliban rule of Mullah Umar in Afghanistan. One investigator of jihad wrote in the 1999s that Mullah Umar and Osama bin Laden met for the first time in Banuri mosque under the tutelage of Mufti Shamzai. Among his 2,000 fatwas the most well known was the one he gave against America in October 2001 declaring jihad after the Americans decided to attack Afghanistan. He had earlier in 1999 already deemed it within the rights of the Muslims to kill Americans on sight. (The fatwa was later modified in explanation.) He was patron of the foremost Deobandi jihadi outfit Harkat-ul Mujahideen. In 1999, after his release from an Indian jail, Maulana Masood Azhar, a top pupil of Mufti Sahib, walked out of Harkat and formed his own organisation (now banned-for-terrorism) Jaish-e Muhammad. Shamzai was clearly inclined to favour Masood Azhar and became a member of the Jaish 'shura' (governing council). He was already a member of the 'shura' of Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) of Maulana Fazlur Rehman. His contacts with Mullah Umar during the period of Talibanisation of Pakistan made him powerful. When the Pakistan military was constrained to make Mullah Umar heed the American warnings it sent a delegation of ulema, including Mufti Shamzai, to Kandahar in late 2001. This was the famous delegation that shockingly turned pro-Mullah Umar instead of putting forward the point of view of Islamabad. After the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 a new situation arose. A five-member 'coalition' of the jihadi organisations was launched to avenge the American invasion. The coalition was called Brigade 313 (the number of warriors in the battle of Badr in the times of the Prophet (PBUH) and comprised Lashkar-e Tayba, Jaish-e Muhammad, Harkat-ul Jihad al-Islami, Harkat-ul Mujahideen al-Alami and Lashkar-e Jhangvi. The coalition was said to be responsible for the killings of Christians in Murree, Islamabad and Taxila as revenge against America. The grand Deobandi consensus born out of jihad in Afghanistan and Kashmir has a sectarian creed which can't be hidden any more. It has links with Al Qaeda and has been responsible for the killing of Christians in Pakistan too. Among the above-mentioned Brigade, three outfits are the backbone of the Kashmir jihad and will become critical for Islamabad if General Musharraf exercises the option of jihad in Kashmir once again. That is probably why the leader of the banned Jaish-e Muhammad, Maulana Masood Azhar, 'disappeared' from Bahawalpur before activists of the Jaish and Harkat al-Jihad al-Islami allegedly carried out the December 2003 attacks on General Musharraf in Rawalpindi. This was revealed by the captured leader of Lashkar-e Jhangvi, Akram Lahori, and widely publicised in the national press. The leader of the Harkat al-Jihad al-Islami, Qari Saifullah, a graduate of the Banuri seminary, was likewise allowed to flee to the Middle East. Out of the five Brigade members two (Lashkar-e Jhangvi and Harkat-ul Mujahideen al-Alami) are the melting-pot Deobandi outfits patronised by Al Qaeda. Their activists freely float within the Deobandi jihad. Ahmad Umar Sheikh, who had his beginning in England with the now-banned-in-Pakistan Hizb al Tahrir, was released by India together with Masood Azhar in 1999 after the hijack of an Indian airliner. After his release, Umar Shaikh tracked Daniel Pearl and got him kidnapped in Karachi with the help of Jaish activists. The man who planned the abortive attempt at assassinating General Musharraf, Amjad Farooqi, was Umar Sheikh's associate in the kidnapping of Daniel Pearl. Mufti Shamzai happened to be the spiritual head of the terrorist organisations banded together in Brigade 313. Before his death, Mufti Shamzai went on record as condemning the policy of the MMA which forced it to agree to a deal with General Musharraf under the 17th Amendment. The Banuri seminary has lost a powerful leader. The power of the Karachi seminary was first assured when General Zia-ul Haq got its founder Maulana Yusuf Banuri to become chairman of Council of Islamic Ideology in 1979. Needless to say, his death will be laid at the door of the United States. *

[ENDS]

San Francisco Chronicle
May 30, 2004 Page E - 2
PAKISTAN'S INNER BATTLE FOR EDUCATION REFORM
Fight pits as rivals progressive forces and old-school religious factions
by Juliette Terzieff

Islamabad , Pakistan -- Progressive forces in Pakistan, a country often derided in the international press as an impoverished backwater overrun with gun-toting wackos, are fighting hard for changes in the education curriculum here that have the potential to bring Pakistan more in line with Western secularized modern education systems and make it a role model for other Islamic countries struggling to progress in the 21st century.

But the battle, which speaks directly to the base identity of Pakistanis, is fierce.

On one side, there are the progressive forces that want a modern Islamic homeland where religion is an individual choice, such as in Malaysia, a developed world player. On the other side, there are conservative forces that seek a narrow interpretation of Islam that determines an individual's life, such as in Saudi Arabia, where thousands of frustrated unemployed youth have few places to turn for relief.

Two years ago, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf became the first -- and so far the only -- Muslim leader since the Sept. 11 terror attacks to acknowledge the damage done by extremist tenets concealed in the education and ruling systems, and, more importantly, vowed to do something about it.

Frustrated in the ensuing period by the resistance to reform put up by many of the country's madrassa (religious seminaries) administrators, and his reliance on clerics for political legitimacy, Musharraf made a tactical decision late last year to pull back, regroup and tackle government-run schools first.

But this battle is proving just as hard.

Just over a month ago, Pakistan's education minister, Zubaida Jalal, was shouted out of parliament for suggesting changes to the current syllabus -- changes including the removal of some Koranic verses and substituting words that might be contributing to making Pakistan a less-tolerant, militant-minded society.

For example, in the eighth class social studies book in Sindh province, authors swapped the word "martyrdom" for "demolition" when describing the 1992 destruction of the 16th century Babri mosque at the hands of a million Hindu nationalists. The Urdu language book for the seventh class changed the description of the deaths of the Prophet Mohammed's companions from "martyrdom" to "murder."

Other changes would have eased the vilification of Hindus and foreigners prevalent in many of the historical lessons.

Jalal's explanation that the changes did not reflect an assault on Islamic ideology went unheard.

Conservative clerics and members of the mainstream Pakistan Muslim League stormed out of the session, decrying the effort as part of Musharraf's plan to "Westernize" the country at the behest of Washington.

"We will resist any and all attempts to turn this country into a secular state," vowed Liaqat Baloch, deputy parliamentary leader for the six-party religious alliance United Action Forum.

Student groups affiliated with the forum took to the streets in protest, circulated petitions, and called for criminal charges against those involved in the changes. Clerics lambasted the changes in their mosques, in the media and in the streets.

The result?

Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali spent days talking to every form of media in the country, promising nothing contrary to Islam or Pakistan would be in the syllabus and that the proposed changes would not happen.

In other words, pro-modern, tolerant, worldly forces found themselves on the run as the government backed down.

"This is all about tactics," said physics Professor A.H. Nayyar, who co- authored a report last year for Islamabad's Sustainable Development Policy Institute that heavily criticized the current syllabi for containing historical inaccuracies and lessons designed to impart intolerance toward non- Muslims and the glory of jihad (holy war).

Many of the textbooks used in government schools are based on a syllabus created 10 to 15 years ago -- before the end of the Cold War and the advent of the Internet. All are infused with dictates of former military dictator Gen. Zia ul-Haq, who embarked on an Islamization program that spawned thousands of willing recruits for military campaigns in neighboring Afghanistan and Kashmir and fomented serious divisions inside Pakistan.

"Musharraf would like to see these changes happen, but he is facing a lot of problems right now," Nayyar said, "and implementation is not going to happen in the face of severe pressure -- and the mullahs know this."

But this is one of those rare cases where what appears to be bad news, is actually pretty good.

For its many -- many, many, many -- problems, Pakistan has a relatively open society when compared to other Muslim countries -- such as Syria, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Dissent is, largely, tolerated. The press is, mostly, free. The national pastime -- arguing, shouting, crying, lamenting - - is alive and well. And there is no other issue more important for Pakistan in a post-Sept. 11 world than to decide if its future will be better than the past or whether its past will determine its future -- a debate sadly quashed by autocratic rulers in most Muslim countries.

"This battle goes right to the heart of what we Pakistanis want Pakistan to be," said Nayyar. "It's not about going against Islam. It is a question of whether we want to be Muslims of the 21st century or the 16th."

Should Musharraf lose this particular battle, the war is not lost, for the debate will surely go on -- and that is a lesson political rulers across the globe would do well to learn.

Juliette Terzieff, a member of the Chronicle Foreign Service, is based in Pakistan.

[ENDS]

Little India
June 3, 2004
SONIA GANDHI AND THE HYPOCRISY OF THE SAFFRON NRIS
By Vijay Prashad

It is a disgrace on the BJP that its leaders revile the Constitution openly and use every racist and cruelly cultural nationalist argument against Sonia Gandhi.

I must admit I have never had anything but contempt for the post-1967 Congress Party. It had begun to betray the Freedom Movement before then. But in the 1970s, the Congress had jettisoned all the values of the anti-colonial struggle and become the party of the establishment. All the "Garibi Hataos" (Remove Poverty) slogans could not conceal the fact that Indira Gandhi's party had become enveloped in corruption and nepotism. It shifted polices only for power and profit, rather than the public interest. When Mrs. Gandhi was killed in 1984, I did not feel any happiness. Such assassinations do not solve the broader social problems within the institutions of India and within the Congress Party. Indeed, the Congress then unleashed its cadre to kill three thousand Sikhs in the matter

Awaaz - South Asia Watch News

News and information provided in conjunction with South Asia Citizens Wire and other sources Posts do not necessarily reflect the views of Awaaz

Saturday, July 03, 2004

News and information provided in conjunction with South Asia Citizens Wire and other sources
Posts do not necessarily reflect the views of Awaaz